Chuck at U Make It Happen reminded me of the George Patten Quote
A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow.
There are two critical understandings around this quote. A quote like this, and Eisenhower's, is often used and misused by both sides of any process argument. Some agilest are fond is using the notion that planning is not needed - which of course is nonsense.
A PLAN is a strategy for the successful completion of the project.
"I plan to attend our sons graduation from college in the spring." "I plan to take a motor home vacation with our adult children." These are strategies for fulfilling some capability.
Plans Describe Capabilities
Another Patton quote is
I need the capability to move a brigade of 3,000 to 5,000 troops 100 miles in ten hours.
Capabilities-based planning specifies the outcome but does not specify how to cause that outcome to appear.
For Plans To Work They Need Schedules
With the specified outcome, there now needs to be a schedule to sequence the work needed to produce that outcome.
You both a Plan and a Schedule before the Probability of Success can be increased
Here's What a Plan Looks Like Notionally
- Define the needed level of maturity at this point in time - what do I need to know at the Preliminary Design Review?
- Define the Significant Accomplishments needed to reach the needed level of maturity at that time - what is the evidence I need to bring to the Preliminary Design Review to assure I understand the design to the units of measure of "preliminary?"
- Define the "exit criteria" for the work performed to produce the needed level of maturity at that time - there are the Accomplishment Criteria - when I perform one of the Work Packages, or complete an iteration, what are the units of measure of "done?"
- Sequence the Work Packages in the proper order to produce a Schedule with resources - for all the work I have identified to get to the planned level of maturity, what dependencies and in what order do I have to perform this work?
